Stop coddling the super-rich, Warren Buffett says

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Taxes was not the driver for offshoring jobs.

Why so many big Corporate bleeding hearts?

No idea. Remember when things were made in AMERICA?

[mawilson 2,133]

Address this point, Mumsie.

Try telling that to the average person who doesn't get all the goodies. The real issue is the tax code. McCourt will probably keep deferring and carrying forward in perpetuity.

You do get all the goodies. If you have a business (whatever it is - selling stuff on eBay)

that had losses, you can write them off against your personal income (assuming the business

is an LLC or another pass-through tax entity, or even if you're a sole proprietor - don't even

need a business structure.)

[sly_wolf 199]

No idea. Remember when things were made in AMERICA?

Yes, and congress does not want to support taxing the wealthy since that also includes them

Then Buffet should support the elimination of all forms of income tax and demand the implmentation fo the FAIR TAX

Anyone here ever get a job from a poor person?

It has to do with paying their fair share like most of us working stiffs have to.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Here's another idea...

1. Define "Super Rich"

2. Determine how much could be raised by taxing them more (assume they would not move their money where it can't be touched)

3. Cut the Federal budget that amount.

Job done.

[mawilson 2,133]

It has to do with paying their fair share like most of us working stiffs have to.

"Working stiffs" are not paying their fair share.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

My link

But they still pay plenty of other taxes, including federal payroll taxes.

Those are reimbursed in the form of an Earned Income Tax Credit.

It gets worse. Those folks get credit for the half of payroll taxes they didn't pay in the form of Social Security and Medicate payments in later years, in the case of survivor benefits, and disability payments.

Edited August 15, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[sly_wolf 199]

"Working stiffs" are not paying their fair share.

Thats right. They are paying more than their fair share.

[_Simpson_ 250]

"Working stiffs" are not paying their fair share.

Exactly. A concept lost on sly_wolf.

I say we stop coddling the "poor".

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Yes, and congress does not want to support taxing the wealthy since that also includes them

It has to do with paying their fair share like most of us working stiffs have to.

Anyone that is a working stiff and thinks they are paying a fair share is an idiot, they either are overpaying or do not understand how it works. The bottom 47% of income earners pay no tax at all. That should cover most of the working stiffs

I have a family of four with two people in college this year and pretty standard personal deductions (mortgage and property tax) I will have to make something like $63,000 (maybe more) before I pay any tax and that's just by doing my taxes online.

If you don't have children, don't have a home that you own and don't have college expenses...oh well, back to my initial assertion.

I would actually pay more under the FAIR TAX proposal but it is what would work for the country.

[sly_wolf 199]

Here's another idea...

1. Define "Super Rich"

2. Determine how much could be raised by taxing them more (assume they would not move their money where it can't be touched)

3. Cut the Federal budget that amount.

Job done.

You have to start somewhere. When we go through a budget process at work they nickel and dime everything to get their numbers.

I would also start by removing salaries for everyone in congress. They should be working for the good of the country and not for money as they do now.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Thats right. They are paying more than their fair share.

So I'm pretty sure you aren't getting any education tax credits.

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Address this point, Mumsie.

The uber-rich, shuck and jive and dance their way out of taxes. Is it legal, didn't say that it wasn't. It is right, no, it's not! Can they average working man take advantage of them, no probably not. A quick example is the accelerated depreciation on vehicles in excess of 6,000 lbs. GVWR (section 179 of the tax code). The only people who could realistically afford to use this were upper class types. Now, it's true that it helped the small business owner but it was and is abused by the uber-rich (it was actually a $25,000 credit for agricultural purposes that Bush cranked up to $100,000), all they need is to buy a large p/u (must have an 8' bed) that costs less than $100,000 and be used for exclusively business purposes. That could mean anything. I'm greatly simplifying things but there are far more tax loopholes that are on the books that make it easier for the wealthy, not the small business owner or the working man.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You have to start somewhere. When we go through a budget process at work they nickel and dime everything to get their numbers.

I would also start by removing salaries for everyone in congress. They should be working for the good of the country and not for money as they do now.

Factor it as a percentage of the whole and cut across the board by that amount. Should be about 1% at most.

[sly_wolf 199]

Exactly. A concept lost on sly_wolf.

I say we stop coddling the "poor".

I am not talking about the poor. The middle class pays the brunt and the topic is about the rich not paying their fair share.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The uber-rich, shuck and jive and dance their way out of taxes. Is it legal, didn't say that it wasn't. It is right, no, it's not! Can they average working man take advantage of them, no probably not. A quick example is the accelerated depreciation on vehicles in excess of 6,000 lbs. GVWR (section 179 of the tax code). The only people who could realistically afford to use this were upper class types. Now, it's true that it helped the small business owner but it was and is abused by the uber-rich (it was actually a $25,000 credit for agricultural purposes that Bush cranked up to $100,000), all they need is to buy a large p/u (must have an 8' bed) that costs less than $100,000 and be used for exclusively business purposes. That could mean anything. I'm greatly simplifying things but there are far more tax loopholes that are on the books that make it easier for the wealthy, not the small business owner or the working man.

All good reasons for the FAIR TAX